Setup Guide

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds genuine context beyond them: the steps execute in the user's browser, they must be presented one at a time, and re-running sign-in connects an additional channel. The 'Quota: no YouTube Data API units' note is useful operational detail for an agent managing API budget.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the state the tool reports, and each sentence carries distinct information (purpose, interaction mode, follow-on behavior, quota). No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and annotations already carry the safety profile. For a read-only onboarding/status tool with one fully documented optional parameter, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single optional 'project' parameter, so the schema fully documents its meaning and default. The description adds no syntax or format detail for it, which is the correct baseline when the schema does the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states what the tool surfaces: what remains before the channel is usable (a one-time Google Cloud setup followed by a Google sign-in). The verb is somewhat implicit — it reads as a state report rather than naming the action — but the resource and content are clear and no sibling tool overlaps with setup/onboarding.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives interaction guidance ('walk them through one step at a time') and hints at the follow-on case ('running the sign-in again connects another channel'), which implies when to use it. However, it never states explicitly when to invoke this versus other tools or what condition triggers it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.